84
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 14:
Line 14: +
User talk:RJJensen (view source)
Revision as of 14:25, September 25, 2009
, 14:25, September 25, 2009→"Revert vandalism" on the Chavez article
Does [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Hugo_Chavez&curid=5224&diff=703420&oldid=703401 this edit] really count as "vandalism"? Or would it be more fair of you to qualify it as a different point of view? A point of view that may be criticized, perhaps, one that may or may not be backed up by whatever evidence is cited--but where is the "vandalism"? [[User:Wayne|Wayne]] 08:44, 25 September 2009 (EDT)
Does [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Hugo_Chavez&curid=5224&diff=703420&oldid=703401 this edit] really count as "vandalism"? Or would it be more fair of you to qualify it as a different point of view? A point of view that may be criticized, perhaps, one that may or may not be backed up by whatever evidence is cited--but where is the "vandalism"? [[User:Wayne|Wayne]] 08:44, 25 September 2009 (EDT)
::it's vandalism--it was designed to attack and denigrate and damage a CP article. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 10:10, 25 September 2009 (EDT)
::it's vandalism--it was designed to attack and denigrate and damage a CP article. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 10:10, 25 September 2009 (EDT)
:::Introducing a different point of view--with a citation, no less--is denigrating and damaging to the article? Is the article that fragile? [[User:Wayne|Wayne]] 10:25, 25 September 2009 (EDT)